items-get_batch

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the operation is a single request and returns a map keyed by ID, which informs about the response structure. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The most critical information (what it does and what it returns) is front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple batch get tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers input (IDs) and output (map of items keyed by ID). It lacks error behavior or limits, but that is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already describes the 'ids' parameter with enough detail ('List of item IDs (@rid format)'). The tool description adds no new meaning beyond 'by IDs', so it does not improve upon the 100% schema coverage baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Gets', specifies the resource 'multiple case file items', and the mechanism 'by IDs in a single request'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like items-get (single item) and items-list (bulk without IDs).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for batch retrieval by IDs, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like items-get. However, the context of sibling tool names (items-get, items-list) makes the distinction clear enough.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.